I have been made aware of the very serious crime of fraud committed by Mrs Justice Anna Pauffley, a senior judge, Detective Constable Rogers of the Child Abuse Investigation Team at Barnet Police Station and Detective Inspector Cannon, who was in charge of a recent police investigation into child rape and murder in Hampstead, London. This fraud is revealed by Judge Pauffley herself, in her own words, in paragraphs 107. and 108. from her “Care Proceedings: Fact Finding” judgement made public, 19th day of March, year 2015:

It is a curious fact that prior to the launch of these proceedings, no police officer had listened to the audio recording made by Jean Clement Yaohirou or watched the film clips of the children. DI Cannon made inquiries at my request to discover that DC Rogers, the member of his team who received the film clips and the audio recording from Mr Yaohirou, had sent them to a property store in Chingford. The focus would appear to have been upon arranging almost immediate ABE interviews.

I say no more at this stage than that the police and social services inquiry could have taken an entirely different course, if attention had been given to those recordings. At the very least, the questions asked of P and Q at interview would have been directed towards other areas of interest.

The video clips and audio recording Judge Pauffley refers to constituted the entire evidence gathered in Ella Draper’s and Abraham Christie’s interviews with Ella Draper’s two young children. Some of these video clips contain the children’s very detailed descriptions and drawings of distinguishing marks, such as warts, birthmarks, tattoos, piercings, etc. on and around the private parts of the adults named by the children as their attackers.

Jean Clement Yaohirou handed all of this crucial evidence to DC Rogers on September 5th, 2014. The police investigation began the same day, but throughout the investigation no police officer “…listened to the audio recording made by Jean Clement Yaohirou or watched the film clips of the children” because DC Rogers, of the Child Abuse Investigation Team at Barnet Police Station, “…had sent them to a property store in Chingford.”

Judge Pauffley rightly points out in paragraph 108. of her fact-finding judgement, “…the police and social services inquiry could have taken an entirely different course if attention had been given to those recordings. At the very least, the questions asked of P and Q at interview would have been directed towards other areas of interest.” This was effectively prevented by DC Rogers, who concealed from the investigating teams – both police and social services – throughout the inquiry, ALL of the crucial evidence he had taken possession of at the very beginning of the investigation. Concealing and failing to disclose this evidence was, and is, FRAUD. As you are aware, ignorance is no defence, especially in the case of a police officer in a position of public trust.

Once DC Rogers’s fraudulent act was revealed to Judge Pauffley by DI Cannon, the Judge had no other lawful option but to stop the proceedings, but she continued. Judge Pauffley’s decision to continue with the proceedings knowing full well the police and social services investigations – which formed the basis of those proceedings – were woefully incomplete and criminally compromised, shows wilful contempt for the law by the Judge and served to perpetuate the fraud. Judge Pauffley’s claim (in paragraph 9. of her fact-finding judgement) that the police and social services investigations were “wide-ranging”,

Knowing DC Rogers had concealed from them the video clips and audio recording evidence, is also clearly fraudulent.

Judge Pauffley also failed to remind DI Cannon of his duty to act on this information concerning DC Rogers.

DI Cannon himself, upon realising DC Rogers had concealed vital evidence to the case, chose to do nothing, and made no protest to the Judge that the proceedings should be stopped. In short, he failed to carry out his lawful duty upon realising a fraud had been, and was being, committed – which is aiding and abetting fraud. Unlike the police officers and social services during the investigation, Judge Pauffley WAS able to view “a dozen or so short film clips of the children being questioned by Ms Draper and Mr Christie and listened to the very lengthy audio recording.” However, it seems the Judge did NOT view the video clips containing the children’s detailed descriptions and drawings of the distinguishing marks on and around the private parts of the adults named by the children as their attackers, as she makes no mention of these anywhere in her twenty-page fact-finding judgement.

To reiterate: The incriminating evidence of fraud perpetrated by Judge Pauffley, DC Rogers and DI Cannon is provided by Judge Pauffley herself, in her own words, in paragraphs 107. and 108. of the “Care Proceedings: Fact Finding” judgement, 19 March, 2015. It is in plain sight for all to see. This fraud not only utterly demolishes the validity and credibility of the police and social services investigations, but as her “fact-finding” report was based largely on that investigation, it destroys the validity and credibility of her judgement too. In short, it is nothing more than a mockery of the law, and therefore null and void.

Incomparably more serious are the EFFECTS of this fraud perpetrated by three public servants in high positions of public trust: It has put at further risk of harm the lives of not only Ella Draper’s children, but the lives of many more children (and adults) in Hampstead and beyond. If the “Distinguishing Marks” and “Drawings” videos had not been concealed from the police, the police interviews of the children would have necessitated questions regarding these distinguishing marks and the names of the individuals the children identified.

The investigating officers would have been compelled by law, to require those people named and physically identified by the children, to submit themselves for medical examination in order to be eliminated from the inquiry.

However, the police are NOW AWARE of the existence of the “Distinguishing Marks” and “Drawings” videos, so there is NOW nothing to prevent a proper and thorough police investigation being carried out, and those people named by the children can come forward to undergo a medical examination to clear themselves.

Chief Commissioner, you are on notice that the lives of many children are at risk of harm, and you are called upon as a servant of the people of this land, to perform your lawful duty and to investigate those people named and physically identified by the children as their attackers without delay. You are also called upon to investigate the crime of fraud committed by DC Rogers, DI John Cannon and Judge Anna Pauffley, which has now been brought to your attention. What is required now is the safe return of Ella Draper’s children to her, or their grandparents’ care, the safeguarding of any of the children considered (by a large and growing proportion of the public) to be at risk of harm, and the commencement of a proper investigation into the alleged rape and murder of children in Hampstead, and beyond. As you realise, any “legal” obstacles impeding these requirements are contrary to the law and wishes of the people of this land.

I hold only to that which is lawful, and do not consent to the transmutation of any living beings mentioned in this witness statement (including myself) to that of “legal person” status, or to any legal interpretation of my words whatsoever. All words and combinations of words used in this witness statement carry solely the meaning I intend them to convey, which is to tell the truth to the best of my ability in order to report the crime of fraud detailed above and to bring about an end to the brutalisation, torture, rape and murder of innocents – as I know such things to be contrary to the laws of humanity.